Yes it does. Cruel as that might be.
Good, now please answer this question. |
|
|
|
I like this hypothetical example. Let's flesh it out: If your parents lived in a gated community, and when you turned 18 set you up with a flat there, would the community fee be an act of violence against you? You agree to the rules by moving in, not by being born. What if the rules are that each member of a household above the age of 18, and with an income, must pay the fee. Simply remaining there isn't an act of consent JA37, do you disagree with this? Was it violence to have you pay when you turn 18 and have an income? Or tossing you out? Or is it only violent when the state does it? I can be evicted by the owner of any owned property. If you're on my property and refuse to leave after being asked, you're trespassing. You're the aggressor, not me. What if you are a child and the owner is your family? Still apply? |
|
|
|
That's called "rent seeking", and is not capitalism.
Well, capitalism is not necessarily rent seeking. But rent seeking requires capital. But it can't. The educators must make a living. Said another way, they must make a profit, otherwise they will have to find some other way to eat. It's unavoidable.
Not true. Parents can home school their kids. |
|
|
|
|
In-person DNA testing. I wonder whether the energy costs of doing that would be more than the energy costs of mining 21 million Bitcoins.
|
|
|
|
|
Father McGruder, if you could take a minute out from kicking ass for the Lord, please tell us why owning things is inherently authoritarian.
|
|
|
|
There are many reasons why one individual would agree to be employed by another. Risk, up front costs, reputation, etc. As always, no state necessary.
Division of labor is conspicuously absent from your list. When neither side gains nor loses more than the other and they only trade what they have fairly gained. So, first of all, gains or loses more what? Matter? Energy? Dollars? Secondly, if you engage in trade, and you have no idea whether you are gaining or losing, how is anyone else supposed to know? labor theory of value Ho-boy.... |
|
|
|
|
Careful. Anarchists may just as easily be Zen monks as Tibetan monks.
|
|
|
|
I have some extra tomato seedlings so I'm selling them in packs of six (6). These are Abe Lincoln, which is an heirloom indeterminate slicing variety. They will keep producing until killed by frost, and you can save the seeds to plant again. Asking 15 7 4 BTC per pack, plus actual shipping at the market exchange rate. 3 day shipping will be approximately $10-$15. I'm located in the central US, and can ship anywhere in the 48 states. I will start shipping May 2, and once a week after that until they are all gone.  |
|
|
|
|
To be fair, the "majority rules" argument is a moral argument. It is based on utilitarianism along with the (flawed) assumption that the majority is stronger or more powerful than the minority, and therefore can and will do whatever it wants by force if necessary.
|
|
|
|
|
It applies to everyone who tries to philosophically justify stupid laws. Looks like that's you.
|
|
|
|
|
Where do you live, Shazow? I will send you a scanner if someone pays for shipping.
|
|
|
|
|
And without a state (an-archy), there would be more state support of higher education?
|
|
|
|
|
Go to Amazon Mechanical Turk. Sign up there and do some work. Sell whatever they pay you in (Amazon credits or whatever) for Bitcoins.
|
|
|
|
|
So you'll start paying for the house waving service the next time you move?
|
|
|
|
|
Someone explain to me how kids rioting for cheaper education constitute "anarchists". Does the state regulate and limit the availability of education or something?
|
|
|
|
I added emphasis. Investors may have consented to a company printing new shares when they bought its stock. That doesn't mean that it won't harm them if it does so. Investors don't need to consent. Corporations issue new shares by right, because they are corporate 'persons' and they own themselves. Issuing shares confers no legal rights of ownership. It is just meaningless claptrap designed to defraud suckers. It is like fiat money -- a unit of exchange backed by nothing whatsoever that can be created at will. Of course, thanks to the illustrious dipshits in the US Justice Dept., you can't do anything like printing your own money. But corporations sure can. So in the modern US, immortal, psychopathic legal fictions have more rights than actual humans. |
|
|
|
|
Wal-Mart offers gas as a loss-leader, at something like a 3-5 cent discount.
Regardless, what do you suppose the transport costs are on margins of 5 cents? Not to mention the labor costs or health costs...
|
|
|
|
|
People who play games on Facebook are very credit-worthy.
This is a great idea and not at all likely to end badly.
|
|
|
|
Whomever takes the product of your labor while giving back relatively less with impunity.
Because labor has inherent value? Or all trades must be equal trades? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
